bruce carlisle massachusetts ocean management: capacity to develop and implement plan
TRANSCRIPT
Massachusetts Ocean Management: Capacity to develop and implement plan
Bruce K. CarlisleOffice of Coastal Zone Management
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Outline• Background on Plan development and implementation
• Brief overview of Plan
• Capacity to implement:– Needs
– Resources
– Partnerships
• Take away points
Ocean Act of 2008• Ocean Management Task Force 2003‐2004: set of findings and recommendations
• Act directs Secretary of EEA to develop integrated ocean management plan by December 31, 2009
• 15 directives, including: – Develop siting priorities, locations, and standards for allowed uses, facilities, activities
– Identify and protect special, sensitive, and unique estuarine and marine life and habitats
– Foster sustainable uses– Support infrastructure necessary for economy and quality of life
• All state approvals must be consistent with Plan
Ocean planning area
Jurisdictional boundaries
Uses, activities and facilities subject to management
Renewable energy‐ Wind energy ‐ Tidal energy‐ Wave energy
Extraction of sand and gravel for beach nourishment and shore protectionTelecommunication and electric cablesPipelines for natural gasFish and shellfish aquaculture
From Ocean Act to Ocean Plan
Ocean Act
Goals and strategies
Plan objectivesDecision‐making guidanceBlueprint for adaptive framework
Siting and compatibility assessmentFunctional compatibility analysisQualitative cumulative impacts/effectsOther policy calls
Data acquisition &developmentNatural resourcesHuman usesUse siting preferences
OceanPlan
Plandevelopment
Develop plan based on synthesis of spatial and management elements
(May 2008 *) (December 2009)
Stakeholder process and participation
• Developing DRAFT plan:– Technical workgroups: data, science, technology – Public meetings throughout coast as well as inland communities
– Ocean Advisory Commission and Science Advisory Council meetings
– More than 100 individual stakeholder meetings– Five public workshops
• Vetting DRAFT plan:– Public comments: >300 letters, input– 5 formal hearings– 25 informational meetings
Ocean Plan
• Draft Plan issued June 2009
• Final Plan promulgated December 2009
• Volume I– Management– Administration
• Volume II– Baseline Assessment– Science Framework
Ocean Plan
• Prohibited area:– Uses, activities and facilities prohibited
• Renewable energy areas:– 2 areas: Gosnold, Vineyard
– Commercial‐scale wind
• Multi‐use area:– Siting and performance standards apply
Capacity needs• Internal:
– Leadership, senior policy vetting and decision‐making
– Policy & planning capabilities across subject areas
– Technical, science expertise across disciplines / fields
– GIS / mapping– Administration, logistics
• External:– Engagement with public, stakeholders, interests through different forums
– Data and information
– Contextual /background: examples, relevant models, decision tools
– Communication / interaction support
Capacity needs
• Internal:– Cabinet level ownership and engagement (Executive Office EEA)
– Executive and Legislative branch support
– “All hands”: Policy, planning, technical, science, GIS and other staff
– ~ $2.5M: state operating & capital, federal CZM grant
Capacity resources
• External:– Massachusetts Ocean Partnership (~$4.5M from Moore Foundation *)
– Ocean Advisory Commission
– Ocean Science Advisory Council
– Federal agencies, NGOs, Universities, etc.
Capacity resources
Partnerships• State agency collaboration
– Exceptionally strong joint work and coordination on key issues: critical habitats, fishing, seafloor/geology , energy
– EEA / CZM lead, other agencies critical
– 56 staff involved• Technical workgroups & stakeholders– Data and information: foundation
• Massachusetts Ocean Partnership (SeaPlan)– Critical public/private relationship and support
– Stakeholder workshops, events, discussions
– Information support: – Synopsis, analysis of other
ocean planning models/tools
– Decision support tools: cumulative impacts, trade‐offs, valuations, etc.
Partnerships
• Ocean Advisory Commission– Fishing, environmental, & renewable energy reps
– Legislators – Reps from all 6 coastal regions (RPAs) ‐ including Mayor of Gloucester, former Mayor of New Bedford, Cape Cod and Martha’s Vineyard Commissions
Partnerships
• Science Advisory Council– Academic institutions: UMass Boston, Dartmouth
– Private, non‐profits: CLF, Batelle, NE Aquarium
– Expertise: fisheries, geology, marine mammals, ecology, economics
• Federal agencies– NOAA, BOEM (MMS), USGS, Corps, EPA, FWS, Coast Guard
Partnerships
Take away points• High profile: resources = scope / scale of effort
– “All‐hands”– Core planning team– GIS: maps and more maps– Massachusetts Ocean Partnership
• High level advisory bodies– Ground‐truthing– Politics
• Ongoing, sustained attention– Promulgate Plan … whew … but then work not done– Regulations, coastal program plan, project review– Addressing priority science and data gaps
